house of representatives in a rare move to rebuke president trump about his racist comments. trump, according to sources, has

welcomed this as a political opportunity. republicans have largely stood by him after he called for the four congresswomen to return to the countries from which they came, even though three of them were born here in america and all of them are citizens. of note, they are all women of color. instead of retreating from his racist attack, trump is now trying to tie the entire democratic party to the liberal positions of these freshmen members. we are waiting to hear from house speaker nancy pelosi. how are democrats balancing condemning the racist attack by the president without fully embracing the politics of the women that he's attacking and be labeled as he wants them to be? >> united on condemning what they're viewing as racist comments from this president. you saw that in that vote last night, the resolution that passed the house with democratic votes and only four republicans supporting that with one independent, but democrats are also divided about some of the tactics going forward, including

whether or not to go as far as one democratic congresswoman wants to go due to what al green, the democratic congressman says are racist views. bigotry, he says, should not be allowed to occur by the occupant of the oval office and democrats should take that extraordinary step sbim peach the president. he is enforforcing a vote that happen in a matter of hours. we're seeing division even over that, impeachment inquiry are saying they don't necessarily favor going this route at this moment. democratic leadership, nancy pelosi also opposes moving forward on this measure. we are told that they hope they are planning to -- would leak to, at the moment, table that resolution, essentially kill it on the house for a bit later. we expect republicans also to vote to kill that resolution because, according to a source familiar with the matter that the white house wants to have a strong vote in their view of

bipartisan vote opposing this measure to this resolution to impeach the president because of what's laid out in the articles of impeachment is essentially racist, according to this allegation from al green. nevertheless, that is what the democrats want to essentially dispose of that, move forward on what things unite them. it was a subject of debate internally in a democratic caucus, meaning this morning. we'll get a chance to hear from the speaker herself in a matter of minutes about whether or not -- how she plans to proceed, what she wants to do next in the aftermath of these votes and effort by this democratic congressman to force the impeachment vote on the floor. brianna? >> thank you, manu. you can see we're awaiting speaker pelosi. this will be a big weekly press conference. reporters are lined up there to do their reports right now. the house floor was thrown into chaos last night during that rare rebuke of the president. in case you missed the drama, it all began after speaker pelosi

introduced this resolution to condemn the president. >> every single member of this institution, democratic and republican, should join us in condemning the president's racist tweets. >> republicans objected. >> i make a point of order the gentlewoman's words are uncomplimentary. it will be taken down. >> an hour-long review by the parliamentarian and congressman cleaver, presiding over the house. >> we don't ever, ever want to pass up, it seems, an opportunity to escalate and that's what this is. i dare anybody to look at any of the footage and see if there was any unfairness, but unfairness is not enough. because we want to just fight. i abandon the chair. >> speaking to cnn this morning, congressman cleaver says this is why he stormed off.

>> i was embarrassed as a legislator in the united states house of representatives. can you imagine what the world is thinking as they watch this dysfunctionality here in washington? >> despite a ruling by the parliamentarian that speaker pelosi did violate a house rule by calling the president's tweets racist, they plan to keep her remarks in the congressional record so there they stay. we're watching the right side of our screen. she'll be live any moment. i want to talk now with former chief of staff to nancy pelosi. francesca chambers, white house correspondent for daily mail.com and cnn political director, david chalian. so the president walks away from this. it's the first rebuke of this kind in more than a century. normally a politician, when they have -- when they make a mistake, when they say something like the president said, they'll retreat from that. he's not. he's trying to capitalize on it. >> which is completely in

pattern with everything we've seen from donald trump from day one. he doesn't retreat. that's not his -- he doesn't believe that's a path to success. he believes doubling down, quadrupling down. now you've seen the president and his aides try and reshape his words. >> sure. >> from sunday, which to me is an acknowledgement that they want it to be on firmer ground that this was about socialist views and not about race, gender and religion, because that was not clear in his tweet sunday at all. it was entirely about race, gender and religion. you can see some movement among the president and his team to try to move this in a more ideological direction, which allows the full-on, partisan battle that you saw take place in the house of representatives that now this entire conversation from racist tweet from the president is now, as donald trump wanted it to be, injected into sort of the daily to and fro of american politics. >> and, nadine, this is the challenge the speaker is confronting. she doesn't want him to be able

to capitalize on this. how does she navigate this moment? >> i think she goes back to 2018 and how democrats won, right? we knew exactly what the president is, and was, and what his plan is for re-election. this is a re-election ploy. they're able to view this as it is. democrats often say democrats are divided and so on. what's important to think about the democratic caucus is we don't have a purity test within the caucus, right? if something needs to be voted on, they vote on it. they're going to continue. that's a discussion that's go ing within that caucus. having the president continuing to be the foil for the democrats, he's not dividing democrats. he's actually uniting democrats. you'll have these daily battles. that's fine. at the end of the day to go to the voters and say you have president trump and you have democrats. who are you going to vote for? 2018 was certainly a barometer for that and we succeeded. >> the president, francesca, is going on the campaign trail. what are we expecting from him? >> he will be talking about this

tonight, i guarantee that. i think what's really important here is that he had another opportunity yesterday to sort of clean this up. and he was asked where is it that you want the women to go? and he was very defiant, looked straight to the camera and said wherever. right? >> or they can stay, he said. >> or they can stay or they can leave. he knows exactly what he's doing with his comments right now, particularly as he heads into this election, as he heads into this rally this evening. the other day on the south lawn, i was the person who asked the original question about it. he lectured media on why don't they just ask about manufacturing? if you saw those photos, he came absolutely prepared to talk about this. all of his notes were absolutely on this topic. he knows exactly what he's doing and where he wants to take it. >> how much of a moment was this for the speaker that this did unite her caucus? they were quibbling before. it was starting to feel like high school. >> it was absolutely critical and demonstrated something that is often kind of forgotten in all of this is that the speaker

is willing to stand up for her members, no matter who you are, no matter what side of the political spectrum you are within the democratic caucus. and having that vote yesterday that demonstrated that democrats are not going to allow the president to go after four of their members and say what he said was very, very important for her. and, look, we'll see what happens a week from now. but this is not going to be forgotten. >> we are awaiting the house speaker. she will be speaking live and taking questions there on capitol hill. so, as soon as this begins, we are going to bring it to you. we'll get in a quick break and be right back. you've tried so many moisturizers...

but one blows them all out of the water. hydro boost with hyaluronic acid to plump skin cells so it bounces back... neutrogena® and try our hydrating makeup. if you have moderate to thsevere rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness

are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira. did you know congress is working to end surprise medical billing? that's when patients are hit with medical bills they thought would be covered by insurance. the problem is big insurance companies want a one-size-fits-all approach that lets them decide

what they'll pay doctors for yocare. letting insurance companies decide means it could be harder for you to see the best doctors when you need them the most. tell congress, "end surprise billing, justice stevens was a true guardian of the constitution, made history as not only the longest serving justice, but as one of its finest. our country mourns his loss. he will lie in state monday, service will be tuesday and again, it is a great loss to our country. today -- last night i had a particular pleasant experience, which was to sign a legislation which enabled us to use the

washington monument as a backdrop for the moon launch. pr pretty exciting. i hope everyone will take advantage of observing that as we observe that historic event in our country's, the world's history. it's pretty exciting. so here we are. as you know, we campaigned on for the people agenda, lowering health care costs, building bigger paychecks, cleaner government. and to that end of bigger paycheck paychecks, this week we'll have three bills on the floor, raising the minimum wage. raising the minimum wage. it will increase wages for up to 33 million workers and lift 1.3 million americans out of poverty. it would help secure fairness and equality for women, many of whom are -- will be the beneficiaries of this, giving the other 20 million working women a raise and help narrow

the gender gap. excuse me. that wage gap, that disproportionately impacts women. we're also proud to pass this bill tomorrow on the anniversary of the seneca falls convention, which america declared that all men and women were created equal. we'll also continue on our promise to workers. today we'll honor our promise to the hardworking men and women of labor as we lift the kettle wax tax, protecting benefits that workers had negotiated and the lewis act, ensuring that millions of americans who receive retirement will receive the retirement and benefit securities they have earned. we're very pleased at the outcome of all of the back and forth on the census, proud of the testimony house counsel made

before the supreme court. census is a pillar, enshrined in our constitution that we are all equally counted and represented. we will continue to file those and hold the administration accountable for the policy decisions. this is not about partisanship. it's about patriotism. and now having instilled fear, hopefully we can alay that fear by having people sign up for the census. as we approach the 200th day mark of our transform active majority, which is coming up soon, house democrats will build on the bold promise we have made on our for the people agenda. we talked about lower health costs, by preserving the prescription drug benefit, lowering the prescription drugs and preserving the pre-existing condition benefit. some of that legislation will be coming up next week. raise workers' wages.

i talked about that. reduce the role of big, dark money in washington, hr-1. part of hr-1, we've divided into parts to save our federal elections, voting rights act and the rest. and we're hoping to get some of these passed discreetly. senator mcconnell has called himself the grim reaper. we have news for him, as i said befo before, these bills are alive and well with the public and public opinion, as lincoln has said, can make almost anything happen. so we look forward to that. questions? i'll come back to you. >> next week at this time, robert mueller will be. what is your expectation for his testimony? is there a chance that after his long-awaited appearance there may not be any clarity on the findings of the special counsel's report? >> i think that the report has

brought some clarity and his own public statement brought further clarity and now when he speaks about it, more people will know what is in the report. i think we should approach it with all of the appropriateness and seriousness of purpose. this is about our country, our constitution and the separation of powers, obstruction of justice, issues like that. so i would say that, again, it's about patriotism. let us listen. let us see where the facts will take us and let us have this be as dignified as our constitution would require. and then we'll see what happens after that. we'll go where the fact also lead us. >> al green said that we have the opportunity to punish the president, we have to send him a message and we're not going to let him make america a racist

country. why is he involved in the approach he's taking? >> in terms of bringing up impeachment? for impeachment, articles of impeachment to succeed, i haven't actually seen his articles of impeachment. they're about racism? we'll deal with that resolution on the floor. as i have said over and over again with all the respect for mr. green. he is a very prayerful person and cares very much about our constitution and country. so as i say with all the respect in the world for him, we have six committees that are working on following the facts in terms of any abuse of power, obstruction of justice and the rest that the president may have engaged in. that is a serious path that we are on. not that mr. green is not serious, but we'll deal with that on the floor. >> will you vote to table it? >> i don't know what we will do, but we will deal with it on the floor. >> on the debt ceiling, you've

been talking to steven mnuchin. what is the pathway and what are the stumbling blocks to get that done? >> let's start with next week and engineer back. we would like to have something on the floor next thursday so that we can send it in a timely fashion to the senate so that they can go through their, shall we say techly senatorial process to get it done in time before they leave. if we're talking about next thursday being on the floor, we have to back up almost until this friday to have an agreement reached so that we can duly note it. under the new rules, we don't count weekends in the 72-hour notice. so we'll have to have something that we can post some time this weekend so that the time ticks away in order for us to go to

rules, to committee -- rules and to the floor. so when we have an agreement, we'll write it up. we have to do all of that by friday evening. >> what are the polishes that are stalling? >> it's all about money. right? and so -- >> is there a certain number in terms of the -- >> no. i think i said yesterday. if you read my letter, it was very clear. our concern was that the additional initiatives that had been added for veterans, whether you approve of the policy or not, they have become the law and we need to cover them. we don't think that that should be coming out of the regular base. so we don't want veterans resources to be competing with each other or competing with other very valuable, domestic priorities. so i think we are -- we are

understanding each other and when we have an announcement, you'll be the first to know. >> on your house resolution condemning the president, were you surprised that more republicans didn't side with democrats? and what do you think at the end of the day was achieved given that it was essentially a party line vote? >> well, the fact is that was it a resolution of the house and not some legislation that would go to the senate and be signed by the president. and it was for us to say. and, by the way, in the most gentle way. you have no idea the provisions that some people wanted to have in that resolution. this is as benign. it condemned the words of the president. not the president but the words of the president. and in doing so, it anchored itself in the words of ronald reagan. ronald reagan, beautiful speech by ronald reagan, which i

reference all the time. and so you would have thought that that benign approach might have appealed to them, but when you say were you surprised, were you disappointed? my expectations are not great, but you always hope that they might do the right thing and say that that language that the president used was not -- was beneath the diagram in any event president, beneath the dignity of the people who were criticizing him. by the way, we were offended that he spoke in such a way about members of congress but we were offended he says that about people across the country all the time. go back to where you came from. and that, by itself definition, those words are racism. go look in the ap and other places where they define certain words. that's what that s we weren't saying he is racist. we were saying that the words that he used were racist. that was as gentle as it could be, considering the

inappropriateness and disgusting nature of what the president said. so, we did what our members wanted to do and had a very strong, 100% vote on it. >> madam speaker, the president is trying to cast this debate as between him and your more vocal members. you've had your resolution. the democrats are rallying behind these members. are you concerned that the president is goading you? >> with all due respect, let's not waste our time on that. we're talking about what we're going to do to help the american people. our caucus is unified on all of that. throughout the campaign i said to the candidates, don't even mention his name. everybody knows who he s you don't have to describe him to anybody. let's just talk about what we are going to do. and we're going to devote the whole month of august to our for the people agenda, which was successful in terms of connecting with people and their

concerns. it still -- the cost of health care, the stagnation of wages and the distrust of government are still -- loom large as concerns for the american people and that's what we're going to be about. we're not having him set our agenda. we're setting our own agenda. >> do you have any concerns that the focus on impeachment today and the votes on the floor related to it could jeopardize robert mueller's appearance next week? >> no. i think we'll get rid of this. we did our resolution expeditiously. we'll deal with the -- mr. green's resolution, but we do have to have a clear path. i do think that the president is trying to -- we cannot, and you cannot and we cannot buy into his fog that he wants to create

over. we all know the argument that could be made against us in terms of our philosophy, in terms of our priorities and the rest. and the president knows there are arguments that could be made against him and, therefore, he wants to distract from them. you have to give him credit. he's a great distracter. that's what this is about. so let's just take it to a better place. let's take it to a better place. america. the president wants to make america great again. we all do. what does that mean? what is america? so many times we've come together and talked about america. america as our ideals in the constitution, an example to the world of founding documents that rejected a monarch and put forth separation of powers, article i, the legislative branch, having that priority enlisting and that is being under -- that's being

dishonored by the president of the united states. america, we the people. we the people, nation of immigrants, by and large. and he is denegrading all the new members to our country. the as president of the united states. america this beautiful land from sea to shining sea and beyond. god's gift to us that he is almost every day, but certainly every week degrading. and saying we're not going to deal with climate on the basis of any science. really? what is america, our values. and that's the debate we have all the time. the battle of the budget and the rest in terms of how we invest in our children's future. and how these things all come together, that under the guidance of our founders. we the people, they said in the

preamble to the constitution. they also said can imagine how many or how different we would be, but they knew we had to be one. and that beautiful guidance, it's something we must constantly keep in mind as we engage in our differences. at the end of the day, we want to be unifying and not dividing. i wish the president would read that. thank you all very much. >> all right. speaker pelosi there, wrapping up her remarks. she said the president is the great distracter. i will say she is the great filibusterer. there's a lot more we wanted to know that maybe we didn't get the answers to, but she basically said -- she didn't want to take the bait that she's being goaded by the president and she wanted to talk about legislation that was on the floor and other things before the democrats. >> she also made clear, which i thought it was a revealing moment, that this resolution condemning the president, she

said she was getting submissions from members that was a lot hotter in language and that this was the benign version. >> can i read what she said? >> please do. >> we did it in the most gentle way. you would not believe the provisions some members wanted. >> and i think that gets at -- remember, the president did the thing that he didn't want to do, which is unify the democrats. they were at a moment of being split. he goes on the attack, it has this ability to unify. what the speaker revealed there is what the split is really underneath. many members of her caucus, and we're seeing this with the impeachment vote this afternoon that she's referring to. they are so fired up in their animosity toward donald trump that that is the fuel of this fired-up energy that many in her caucus have. and that is not where the speaker necessarily thinks -- she understands the value of that. that's not necessarily the message that she wants to be

running on to maintain her majority. i think you saw that in the way she revealed what did go to the floor, what was coming in, how she's dealing with this impeachment thing this afternoon. she's in this constant, constant battle of harnessing this energy but not letting it overrun the party in its message. >> as david mentioned on the impeachment piece of this with congressman al green. she was very gentle in trying to be respectful. >> absolutely. >> to the congressman, but she wouldn't say what she was going to do. are they going to proceed on this? are they going to send it to committee? are they going to table this impeachment resolution? >> i'm sure discussions are ongoing with how to proceed with this. >> do you think they're not necessarily sure? >> i think they'll make the decision at the right time. sometimes these things take a while. you're right, david, to write a resolution that's going to unite the full caucus, that also takes a bit of, you know, nancy pelosi skill. look, the great unifier. going back to when they first

won the majority, right, we were dealing with the iraq war, with social security. we're dealing with impeachment of president bush, who was able to unify the democratic party in an off-year election and bring them into -- and help bring barack obama to the white house. i think it was nancy pelosi and the democrats. she's gone through this before. she had members back then, congressman kucinich, for example. she has this new crop of energized members on both left, in the middle and also more conservative. and she has to deal with a caucus. she has been capable. she has been doing this for a while. >> she is very effective in that, right? she walked in. she knew what she wanted to say. when people asked her about the divide between herself and the squad, i don't want to talk about that. when they asked about the impeachment, we'll deal with that on the floor. america the beautiful. thanks, everybody else. let's go. you're very effective.

>> and so on and so forth. all right, thank you so much. >> thank you. >> so how are evangelical republicans respond iing to thi firestorm? i'll speak live with one. notorious drug lord el chapo speaking at his own sentencing. hear what he said. hi. maria ramirez! mom! maria! maria ramirez... mcdonald's is committing 150 million dollars in tuition assistance, education, and career advising programs... prof: maria ramirez mom and dad: maria ramirez!!! to help more employees achieve their dreams.

y prestige creams not living up to the hype? one jar shatters the competition. . oveven $400.200, and fact check this ad in good housekeeping.

olay. most people think a button is just a button. ♪ that a speaker is just a speaker. ♪ or - that the journey can't be the destination. most people haven't driven a lincoln. discover the lincoln approach to craftsmanship at the lincoln summer invitation. right now, get 0% apr on all 2019 lincoln vehicles plus no payments for up to 90 days. only at your lincoln dealer.

plus no payments for umno kidding.rd. but moving your internet and tv? that's easy. easy?! easy? easy. because now xfinity lets you transfer your service online in just about a minute with a few simple steps. really? really. that was easy. yup. plus, with two-hour appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. now all you have to do is move...that thing. [ sigh ] introducing an easier way to move with xfinity. it's just another way we're working to make your life simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started. republican lawmakers are

largely siding with the president, choosing to defend instead of condemn his racist remarks in which he told four democratic lawmakers, all women of color to, quote, go back to their, quote, crime-infested countries. all but one of them were born in america, their country is the u.s. 187 republicans voting against that resolution and these four republicans broke ranks and condemned the president's tweets, will hurd of texas, susan brooks of indiana, brian fitzpatrick of pennsylvania and fred upton of michigan. i want to bring in evangelical republican leader bob vanderplotz, socially conservative organization based in iowa and co-chaired senator ted cruz's 2016 presidential campaign. bob, thanks for joining us. >> it's good to be here. >> so, when you initially saw this tweet, the first tweet of the president's, did you think it was racist? >> well, you know, i thought it

was below the dignity of the office. quite frankly, i thought i'm not quite sure why you want to get into that fight. these four were calling nancy pelosi racist. it was like an interparty fight. he stepped into it. yeah, i wish he would tweet less on this type of thing and talk about the issues more. there are a lot of good things happening under his presidency if he would stay focused there. i think that would benefit him not only in his governing but also in the upcoming election. >> but is it racist? >> well, you know, i don't know if it is racism. we had kamala harris calling joe biden racist. you had these four calling nancy pelosi racist. i would say it's insensitive. >> she didn't actually -- i just have to interject. she did not say that. i want to be clear. so you say this isn't -- you don't know if it's racist. on what basis would it -- >> we just had senator tim scott

at our annual leadership summit. we talked about racial reconciliation. we have to be careful with the words that we use and the things that we say, but the other thing we don't want to do is blow this out of proportion either and say everybody is a racist today as well. i think president trump would have called out these four congresswomen if they were white versus minority as well. >> but the way -- it's the way he called them out. for instance, he didn't tell bernie sanders to go back to his home country. there seems to be one basis for which he would assume these women did not come from the u.s., and that would be race. isn't that the definition of racism? >> well, that's where it's definitely an insensitive tweet. there's no doubt about that. remember, brianna, i grew up with a world war ii dad who love this had country a great deal and talked to me about you either love the country, embrace it, give to it, serve it.

if you don't like the country, find other some place, find some better place to go, knowing there would not be a better option. just in iowa last night, i'm sure you've got footage of this, but presidential candidate kamala harris said donald trump should go back to where he came from as well. so, i don't think anybody wins when we start going to the lowest common denominator. i think we should think bigger, look higher, cast a vision of unity for this country. i don't think we should be just going to words real quickly either that are going to divide this country. i don't think that's helpful to anybody. >> he is the one who put out the tweet. walk me through this. i'm seeing some similarities in republican members of congress, 187 of them, who voted against this resolution. and they don't want to publicly say something that is clearly racist is racist. you will only go as far as to say that it's insensitive. why are you making that distinction and not taking the step to condemn a remark that's clearly racist?

there was one basis, race, by which he made this comment about them. it was not about their policies. he said go back to the countries, crime-infested countries from which you came. so why do you make that distinction to say insensitive? >> because i think we have to be careful when we use those words. remember, brianna, i'm also one who stands up for the institution of marriage and god's design of sexuality. and when i do, i get called a hater and a bigot right away. there's nothing hateful or bigoted in me whatsoever. that's why i'm careful when i read a tweet or comment like that to say what is it? what's in his heart type thing. that's why i bring up. just at the presidential debate kamala harris was pointing at joe biden. you have these four calling nancy pelosi. >> you don't waffle on that issue. why waffle on this one? >> i don't think i am waffling on this issue. matter of fact, i've been very

consistent in saying about president trump's tweets as far as going into these types of things. i don't think it's helpful for the country. if he can cast more focus on the things he has gotten done for this country, more the july 4th celebration, that's a way better element for the country. nancy pelosi and the press conference she just had, she's trying to put this behind her. had an she doesn't want to do is have these four congresswomen become the face of their party. and i think these presidential candidates will have to start making a decision, too. these four, who have been very clear on their views in regards to whether it be israel, socialism or on green deal, is that the tract that that party wants to go down? nancy pelosi wants to put it behind her as well. >> bob vander plaats, thank you

for joining us from iowa. i'm going to speak live with the deputy commissioner of customs and border protection. also senator bernie sanders will join cnn as senator kamala harris and joe biden go after his medicare for all plan. stand by for that. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?

eh, not enough fiber... chocolate would be good... snacking should be sweet and simple. the delicious taste of glucerna gives you the sweetness you crave while helping you manage your blood sugar. glucerna. everyday progress too many people a restless night's sleep. there's a better choice. aleve pm. the only one to combine a safe sleep aid and the 12-hour pain-relieving strength of aleve. that dares to last into the morning. so you feel refreshed. aleve pm. there's a better choice.

on friday, members of the house sub committee will head to the rio grande to tour border

facilities. overcrowding is getting worse and is, quote, a ticking time bomb. robert perez is with us, the deputy commissioner for customs and border protection. in this report from diana shaw, she makes this assessment that this is a ticking time bomb. what's your reaction to that? >> thanks for having me, brianna. >> of course. >> good to be back with you. it's what we've been talking about and you sounding the alarms on for better than over a year, overcrowding, the system as it's built now, the legal framework that needs to be remedied and the entirety of an immigration system oversaturated by the volume and type of demographic we are seeing arriving on our borders. we welcome this group that's coming down the end of the week. we've had over 60 different delegations and staffers visit with us over the course of the past year. going down in addition to our own independent people, going down to check on how it is we're

doing with respect to taking care and doing all we possibly can to deal with what continues to be an unprecedented crisis. >> teams documented noncompliance with standards applicable to the detention of, as the inspector calls it, alien children, undocumented children, hot meals, showers and a change of clothes. this is what we've been hearing. this is not, i would say, improving to the degree that we're noting it from this inspector general's reporting. >> first of all, everyone in our custody, in our ports of entry have access to fresh water, access to meals they have access to an unprecedented level of medical attention now, too, which we've gone out of our way to put into those facilities. >> so you're saying it's no longer the case? >> what i'm saying is that the volume in and of itself limits

any other saturated volume, if you have a hotel that can only hold 2,000 people but now you have 20,000 people, it's going to take a little more time to come around to actually deliver some of those supporting items that you might have. the supplemental funding that came through after nearly two months of us asking for it is making a difference, particularly with the children, brianna. the children are the most vulnerable ones, that these alien-smuggling organizations are exploiting. >> understood but i want to ask you about the cvp and these children. npr has reported there was an agent at the el paso facility asked a 3-year-old girl to pick which parent would stay with her. this was traumatizing. are children being forced to pick a parent? >> absolutely not. >> then this is not true?

>> what i can tell you -- >> are you saying that -- >> i'm not familiar with that particular case. the only time we're separating children from adults is if there's a danger to that child. the safety and well-being of that child if, there's a criminal history, medical issue that is required to be addressed, the mental health or something else that that is what we're addressing. i'm not familiar with the specific case you're referring to, i will tell you that is the only time we are separating any children with any of their adults right now. >> the number was up to more than 700 by may. this is still happening a bit. >> on the backs of the most vulnerable. families and children, what they're doing is using children as virtual passports. adults coming across with children that are not theirs or

recycling children, through the entirety of the immigration process, mord to just facilitate the movement of people through our borders. >> in this number i quoted, there are infants. some are not being recycled. they're not coming in being used as decoys and what not. some are coming in as migrants. there are hundreds of children who cbp has to be in compliance because there are that many questions where it's questionable. in all of these cases it's a question of the parent posing a darnger to the child? >> i'm not familiar with the data points you're referring to, what i can tell you is, so far this fiscal year. >> what are your data points? >> what we've identified is over 3500 fraudulent families that have come across the border just this fiscal year. since october 1, cbp has

identified over 3500 different cases of ice homeland security investigation alongside our cbp agents, they are investigating an unpresident dented amount of child recycling cases, it's terrible how these children are being exploited by these criminal organizations. that's why we need the changes to the legal framework we've been talking about for the past year. >> there are 62 current cbp employees who internal investigators have identified as being connected with these facebook groups where they have trafficked in derogatory posts about migrants and even members of congress who have tried to support efforts for migrants on the border, meanwhile, we see reporting in a new york times report, describing border agents who are working teary eyed, who

are concerned about the children, who are even bringing in things they can to occupy children. have you members like these on the facebook group. you have people who are asking a 3-year-old to pick a parent, and it's making the border patrol such a boogy man. how do you come back from that? >> well, we come back from it in this way, by me assuring you and your viewers that the 60,000, the vast majority of the entirety of the 60,000 professionals of cbp are exactly that. professionals that adhere to our core values. >> these aren't one off stories, though. there are so many stories of border patrol agents of behaving badly, treating migrants like they're subhuman. these are just -- i could go on and on and on. what do you do about those people? >> what we do about those people, we dill gantly and aggressively investigate every allegation of misconduct. we have high standards of

conduct that we expect people to adhere to both on and off duty. i have to respectfully disagree, it's a small percentage of the total of that 60,000, the vast majority of our people are agents and officers, every one of our employees are compassionate, mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, who take seriously the oath they took to perform this incredible mission every day. and yes, those are the stories like the 4,000 rescues that we've affected so far this year as well, that i want to make sure you and your viewers are aware of that is cbp, that is the face of this agency, and we deal any allegation of misconduct aggressively, that is something that disappoints every single one of us. >> thank you so much for coming in. we appreciate it. senator bernie sanders slamming joe biden on twitter for his medicare for all claim, and accusing the vice president

of not telling the truth, his interview next. ♪ woman 1: this is my body of proof. man 1: proof of less joint pain and clearer skin. man 2: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 2: ...with humira. woman 3: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. announcer: humira can lower your ability

to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. man 3: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 4: go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action.

the doctor's office might mejust for a shot.o but why go back there when you can stay home with neulasta® onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta® reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1% a 94% decrease. neulasta® onpro is designed to deliver neulasta® the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta® is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta® if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim).

an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. if you'd rather be home ask your doctor about neulasta® onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card.

hello on this wednesday, i'm

anna cabrera in for brooke baldwin. one day after the house passed a resolution condemning the president's racist tweets, the president is no closer to apologizing while speaker pelosi said this moments ago. >> we were offended that he spoke in such a way that members of congress -- but we're offended that he says that about people across the country all the time. go back where you came from. and that by its definition, those words are racism. we weren't saying he was racist, we were saying the words he used were racist, that was as gentle as it could be, considering the inappropriateness and the disgusting nature of what the president said. >> the president seeking his re-election as the house of represve